Leeds Bradford Airport’s Expansion Plans Under Public Inquiry

[Aviador]

I have read post 29 on 3 occasions now and I can see how people are reading it in a negative way.
I can't understand why these 3 councillors have "published" what the planning inspector has decided.
It begs the question
1. How do they know the planning inspector's decision?
2. Are all councillors privy to this information, if so why haven't more of them published it, especially councillors who oppose the Airport?
3. Are these 3 councillors opposed to the Airport.
4. Am I correct in assuming the inspector has no connection with LCC and is totally objective?
5. Can I expect LBA to become the airport Yorkshire deserves, and needs, in my lifetime? (I'm75)

1. It is likely they will be told at the same time as the airport so they have time to prepare a response.
2. Almost certainly.
3. Absolutely YES, they are all against the airport in any shape or form and for the record they are Liberal Democrats.
4. Supposedly so.
5. I wouldn't like to guess but as a fit healthy 75 year old there is still time.

 

[LBAYORKIE]

1. It is likely they will be told at the same time as the airport so they have time to prepare a response.
2. Almost certainly.
3. Absolutely YES, they are all against the airport in any shape or form and for the record they are Liberal Democrats.
4. Supposedly so.
5. I wouldn't like to guess but as a fit healthy 75 year old there is still time.

Colin Campbell isnt anti airport, but he isnt particularly helpful. Can you just confirm who the others are please?

 

[Aviador]

Colin Campbell isnt anti airport, but he isnt particularly helpful. Can you just confirm who the others are please?

He wasn't anti airport but he is now as are his colleagues.

 

[White Heather]

Colin Campbell isnt anti airport, but he isnt particularly helpful. Can you just confirm who the others are please?

If he's not anti airport, he does a good impression. And he voted against the new terminal being a member of the plans panel at the time. For reasons I fail to understand, all the Lib Dem Councillors seem to opposed the airport. Mine certainly does.

 

[LBAYORKIE]

If he's not anti airport, he does a good impression. And he voted against the new terminal being a member of the plans panel at the time. For reasons I fail to understand, all the Lib Dem Councillors seem to opposed the airport. Mine certainly does.

He felt the airport needed to make a bigger contribution to infrastructure etc.
He suggested a capitation charge I believe which I thought (on the face of it) was a good idea. The higher the number of passengers the more LCC would get. It would also have given LCC an incentive to permit expansion.

 

[White Heather]

He felt the airport needed to make a bigger contribution to infrastructure etc.
He suggested a capitation charge I believe which I thought (on the face of it) was a good idea. The higher the number of passengers the more LCC would get. It would also have given LCC an incentive to permit expansion.

So he wanted the airport to cough up and pay for things the Council should do. That's effectively what Section 106 does and they only apply if approval is given, so objecting and trying to block the new terminal was like shooting yourself in the foot. He's complained openly about the poor facilities at LBA in the past yet failed to support the chance to develop a world class and efficient new one, or the jobs it would create.

 

[LBAYORKIE]

So he wanted the airport to cough up and pay for things the Council should do. That's effectively what Section 106 does and they only apply if approval is given, so objecting and trying to block the new terminal was like shooting yourself in the foot. He's complained openly about the poor facilities at LBA in the past yet failed to support the chance to develop a world class and efficient new one, or the jobs it would create.

Ive only had a couple of conversations with him in the past but I get the impression he's a real stickler and he uses the same approach on all planning matters.

 

[LBAYORKIE]

Having briefly researched the matter Im not sure that the 'High Court' option is appropriate in this case. A specific breach of the law has to be identified and its very expensive. Im sure the planning inspector has done his homework on this one and hasnt left any scope for a legal challenge.

I think submission of a new planning application to LCC is going to be the best bet.

What happens in the meantime though?
Do flights have to be limited with immediate effect?

 

[Aviador]

Having briefly researched the matter Im not sure that the 'High Court' option is appropriate in this case. A specific breach of the law has to be identified and its very expensive. Im sure the planning inspector has done his homework on this one and hasnt left any scope for a legal challenge.

I think submission of a new planning application to LCC is going to be the best bet.

What happens in the meantime though?
Do flights have to be limited with immediate effect?

I believe if the High Court isn't an option then a new planning application will be the next course of action. I think that is essentially what the council wants so they can impose a whole new raft of restrictions on LBA, maybe even a passenger cap. The airport will have to spell out what that means in layman's terms for the idiots who don't understand how a 24 hour business works.

 

[Sherburnflyer92]

I believe if the High Court isn't an option then a new planning application will be next course of action. I think that is essentially what the council wants so they can impose a whole new raft of restrictions on LBA, maybe even a passenger cap. The airport will have to spell out what that means in layman's terms for the idiots who don't understand how a 24 hour business works.

So those idiots include, the spineless no balls mayor, the idiotic unintelligent Labour MP’s of Leeds, and the majority stupid relics from 1980’s councillors plus the green freaks? They’d have to spell it out like speaking to reception children. In fact no, 2 year olds. In fact no, 2 year olds get a better grasp of it than any politician/ councillor around Leeds.

If they impose a pax limit based on local infrastructure maybe they should have approve the WOLR (west orbital link road). But again LCC and its council members for you. Complete and utter tossers.

Just a thought If we have a very strict night movement will this effect any new base from maybe easyJet?

If it doesn’t affect NEO/MAX aircraft. I can see easyJet with 2/3 neos and A321NEO from Jet2 sooner rather then later.

 

[LBAYORKIE]

I believe if the High Court isn't an option then a new planning application will be next course of action. I think that is essentially what the council wants so they can impose a whole new raft of restrictions on LBA, maybe even a passenger cap. The airport will have to spell out what that means in layman's terms for the idiots who don't understand how a 24 hour business works.

As I understand it LCC can't impose more restrictions than there are already so we cant go 'backwards'. Of course any lessening of the restrictions may result in a trade-off, but thays a matter of negotiation.

The restrictions are currently linked to the terminal, so they need to be changed to be 'stand-alone'

 

[White Heather]

So those idiots include, the spineless no balls mayor, the idiotic unintelligent Labour MP’s of Leeds, and the majority stupid relics from 1980’s councillors plus the green freaks? They’d have to spell it out like speaking to reception children. In fact no, 2 year olds. In fact no, 2 year olds get a better grasp of it than any politician/ councillor around Leeds.

If they impose a pax limit based on local infrastructure maybe they should have approve the WOLR (west orbital link road). But again LCC and its council members for you. Complete and utter tossers.

Just a thought If we have a very strict night movement will this effect any new base from maybe easyJet?

If it doesn’t affect NEO/MAX aircraft. I can see easyJet with 2/3 neos and A321NEO from Jet2 sooner rather then later.

The ruling seems to be that the QC0.25 aircraft such as the NEO and MAX still count against the night quota despite being quieter than those prop aircraft that are exempt! If so, there's no incentive for airlines to use these types here, nor much incentive for LBA to offer discounts for them to do so. Truly bonkers. Unless the airport find a way around this, the impact on Jet2 would be significant as they are totally reliant on most of their based fleet landing after 2300 and a few departing before 0700. Ryanair don't do this to such a degree but once the quota is gone, then what? Divert? How are LBA expected to plan for night movements given the frequency of delays, which now also count. Its totally unworkable.

LBA could just carry on, and pay the fines, but if the Council get an injunction then that would stop. This is a matter which in my view, needs the likes of Jet2 to step up, support LBA, and rattle a few cages. They are, after all, a major Leeds based employer and they need to make sure LCC understand what they might lose.

As for Easyjet , they are in a position to increase their presence here considerably using non based aircraft, which is a good thing, but this certainly won't encourage any airline to base here.

 

[Len Fish]

It’s estimated that Jet2 employ around 1400 people in Leeds, 700 at the airport and 700 in their Leeds office. I realise that these are people’s livelihoods but Jet2 could politely point out to LCC out that in this day and age their corporate HQ and the office jobs could easily be relocated elsewhere.

 

[LBAYORKIE]

I

The ruling seems to be that the QC0.25 aircraft such as the NEO and MAX still count against the night quota despite being quieter than those prop aircraft that are exempt! If so, there's no incentive for airlines to use these types here, nor much incentive for LBA to offer discounts for them to do so. Truly bonkers. Unless the airport find a way around this, the impact on Jet2 would be significant as they are totally reliant on most of their based fleet landing after 2300 and a few departing before 0700. Ryanair don't do this to such a degree but once the quota is gone, then what? Divert? How are LBA expected to plan for night movements given the frequency of delays, which now also count. Its totally unworkable.

LBA could just carry on, and pay the fines, but if the Council get an injunction then that would stop. This is a matter which in my view, needs the likes of Jet2 to step up, support LBA, and rattle a few cages. They are, after all, a major Leeds based employer and they need to make sure LCC understand what they might lose.

As for Easyjet , they are in a position to increase their presence here considerably using non based aircraft, which is a good thing, but this certainly won't encourage any

Im sure, unless Ive underestimated him VH has a Plan B.

What Im really not looking forward to is the media coverage, no doubt giving 'the opposition' the opportunity to gloat on air.

Might be a suitable juncture for VH to spell out the negative implications to the region via the media.

 

[White Heather]

I

Im sure, unless Ive underestimated him VH has a Plan B.

What Im really not looking forward to is the media coverage, no doubt giving 'the opposition' the opportunity to gloat on air.

Might be a suitable juncture for VH to spell out the negative implications to the region via the media.

Yes, he needs to lay it on thick and spell out clearly what this could lead to. Still, the answer is available via a planning application, but we all know the drama.that comes with it. Its all so exasperating. Personally, Im tired of it. Its been this way my entire life!

 

[LBAYORKIE]

Yes, he needs to lay it on thick and spell out clearly what this could lead to. Still, the answer is available via a planning application, but we all know the drama.that comes with it. Its all so exasperating. Personally, Im tired of it. Its been this way my entire life!

And mine too. Its very stressful. I shouldnt take it so seriously!

 

[Sherburnflyer92]

Need someone to lay it on thick alongside Ryanair and Jet2.

Ultimately it's the economy of Leeds they are playing with and Leeds council taking advice / listening to the woke dangerous lot is so disingenuous. GALBA are dangerous, people who are anti aviation are dangerous.

 

[752]

Labour seme to supportive Airport Expansion, as mentioned earlier look at what's happened at BHX. Hindering LBA's ability to expand again puts the city leaps and bounds behind our neighbours. GALBA should be protesting this joke of DSA reopening instead.

LBA has an unfair disadvantage to its neighbouring airports also due to the night time hours being classed as different also. It isn't fair at all.

I can bet airlines especially Jet2 will be keeping a close eye on this also and hopefully have a big input and influence over it. They seem to have / trying to have a good relationship with politicians also.

 

[Sherburnflyer92]

Problem is with member, saying Labour support airport growth is completely and factually incorrect for Leeds.

Maybe in Manchester, Maybe in Birmingham they do. Maybe government strategy is pro aviation.
Their MP's and Councillors understand a lot of the benefits of aviation.

Sadly in Leeds, not one Labour MP is supportive of the airport (Alex Sobel - MP and dipstick, was so two faced when it come to the airport, supporting it, getting elected, then going against the new terminal). The Council do not want to support anything that assist with the airport (look at what they've done - east link road approved, the same benefits for the east would happen in the west but because it supports the airport it's been rejected even though it would do Rawdon the world of good).

Sadly therefore I will also be anti Labour Leeds, anti Labour councillors. In fact most Leeds councillors are pretty idiotic at not supporting their airport and rather driving (literally) people over the the pennines to Manchester.

 

[Crashgate]

A bit of digging and it seems that the decision was made last week on the 18th.

Link to this is https://acp.planninginspectorate.gov.uk/ViewCase.aspx?Caseid=3354210&CoID=0 and the PDF of the decision can be downloaded.

Good for Insomniacs. Maybe not for the airport at the moment.